The Pros And Cons Of The Fugitive Slave Act

1084 Words 5 Pages
Many issues in slavery led to the Compromise of 1850 or otherwise the Fugitive Slave Act. The Fugitive Slave Act was written by Congress in 1850, the purpose was to solve problems about slavery. One of the many problems was to the undecided status of the state of California. The south wanted California to be a slave state, but the north was trying to stop the expansion of slavery. (Give me liberty). Eventually California became a free state, but Texas become a slave state and the United States would pay the debt of Texas’s independence. This act was intended for the slaves and slave owners of the south. The act was bias towards the south, because of the many advantages they gained. One gain for the south, was runaway slaves would have to be returned to their southern owners (Give Me liberty). Many northerns did not like this Fugitive Slave Act, because many thought this gave slavery the advantage of expanding (Historical Summary). The south took advantage of this act and would enslaved freemen as slaves An example is Solomon Northup, becoming a slave (Historical Summary). These are the reason why this act was bias towards the south and why the Civil War started. The city of Boston showed bias to the south and the Fugitive Slave Act. …show more content…
Calhoun. A state senator for South Carolina, which was a slave state. This speech was intended for people who disagreed with the Fugitive Slave Act. Calhoun described how the north thought slavery was a sin and inhumane. Many people of the north thought it was a crime and a threat. If the union abolished slavery, the south would be force to succeed to dissolve from the Union. He believed the Fugitive Slave Act needed to be enforced, because the North overpowered and outnumber the south. He thought it was important to keep this argument, it can go both ways and Calhoun tried his best to keep it towards the south. This could also cause the nation to split in two different

Related Documents